I didn't feel any draging. It was fairly well balanced. They do have to talk you know...
I dunno, to me it was fine. Lawrence and Gwen got they're relationship going and all... About the dialogue, which was mostly fine, I thought there was one really corny line. When Lawrence talks to Singh and sees the silver buckshots, he asks "are you hunting monsters?" and Singh answers "sometimes monsters hunt you." Lol, what does that mean? Just trying to sound like a really spiritual and wise sikh, aren't you? Hahaha
Like, the Green Zone. Which has had about as many problems as Wolfman.
Now I know why it's getting some bad reviews.
Movies like SAW have basically ruined horror films.
People don't want a good story with good, established ACTORS. They don't want emotion or a fleshing out of anything.
They want their gore and death right out in front and within the first five minutes now.
They want a simplistic to non-existent plot that gets out of the way of the screaming and murder and blood, that is gaudy and completely unnecessary.
This movie is nothing like that. Amazing actors, great story, realistic violence and blood and gore integral to the story(because it's about a ****ing werewolf).
Classic horror is dying, and The Wolfman is doing all it can to save it. But I'm thinking that people, in all their idiocy, just don't care about the classic monsters anymore.
And as a classic horror fan, a fan of TRUE monsters like vampires(that don't play baseball in the ****ing sun), werewolves(that aren't giant huskies and that can turn whenever they want), and the like, it deeply pains me to see it happening.
Horror is dying, and SAW is the casket they'll bury it in.
블라스;18055923 said:![]()
Completely agreed, man.
I've had it with these new ADD-ridden modern audiences, particularly the SAW ones, who get incredibly offended when you tell them that their little gore-fest movies do NOT offer some kind of deep philosophical life message, which is something they somehow believe.
블라스;18055954 said:Yeah, believe me....I get it. But it's gonna get a lot uglier before it gets better, man....audiences get dumber every year.
A Hammer fan! You can't beat Horror of Dracula, eh? Or The Mummy? Though I still need Curse of Frankenstein. Man....my favorite Hammer movie is still Captain Kronos.
블라스;18055977 said:The ones I have are pretty standard DVDs.
Did Hammer ever make a werewolf movie?
Now I know why it's getting some bad reviews.
Movies like SAW have basically ruined horror films.
People don't want a good story with good, established ACTORS. They don't want emotion or a fleshing out of anything.
They want their gore and death right out in front and within the first five minutes now.
They want a simplistic to non-existent plot that gets out of the way of the screaming and murder and blood, that is gaudy and completely unnecessary.
This movie is nothing like that. Amazing actors, great story, realistic violence and blood and gore integral to the story(because it's about a ****ing werewolf).
Classic horror is dying, and The Wolfman is doing all it can to save it. But I'm thinking that people, in all their idiocy, just don't care about the classic monsters anymore.
And as a classic horror fan, a fan of TRUE monsters like vampires(that don't play baseball in the ****ing sun), werewolves(that aren't giant huskies and that can turn whenever they want), and the like, it deeply pains me to see it happening.
Horror is dying, and SAW is the casket they'll bury it in.
I go see movies that I must see and then I decide for myself. I let critics decide what movies to see for ones that I would like to see or are iffy about but can wait. This isn't a movie that I would go to a midnight showing or stand in line for so I will let critics tell me if I should spend my money or not.
Without critics, there would be some great movies that I wasn't sure about seeing that ended up being fantastic movies. I never had any motivation to see No Country For Old Men or The Hurt Locker and critic reviews told me to go see it and damn am I glad I did...because they got stellar reviews.
So this double standard with critics is stupid. We use them all the time. If a movie is doing great, people will note the RT score or certain reviewer's opinions. If a movie isn't doing so well, suddenly critics don't count and only this or that critic's opinion matter. If you must see this movie, see it! Don't let anybody stop you. If you are iffy about a movie...then there is certainly nothing wrong with gauging other people's opinions to see if this movie is worth seeing. I personally have 2-3 critics that share my taste in movies. If they like it, then I will probably like it and vice versa.
Do I believe that films like Saw have ruined horror? No. Most horror films are not that great. Horror has always had it's ups and downs.
It's a rare thing for a horror film to really blow the general population away. People want good stories, it's not like someone walks into a film saying to themselves ''I want to see a film with a bad story, no emotion with terrible actors''.
Do I believe films like Saw are bad horror films? Most of them, yeah, including terrible remakes such as The Hitcher, House Of Wax, The Omen etc.
Horror will NEVER die, because a lot of the time they are cheap to make and will mostly likely make back the money.
These are just a short list of whats to hit on the horror scene this year.
Predators
Buried
Creature from the Black Lagoon
Frozen
Hatchet 2
The Thing
Predators isn't horror. It's sci-fi. Not even the first movie was horror.
The Thing prequel will suck. It will probably barely be horror.
I can't wait for Creature from the Black Lagoon.
Never heard of buried, frozen or Hatchet 2. Are they remakes?
They're not remakes. Hatchet was very well received in the horror circles and fans kept asking for the sequel. The people who made Hatchet also made Frozen which is doing very well.
Hmm. Interesting.
Never heard of them though.